What is OmniNerd?

Welcome! OmniNerd's content is generated by you, the reader. Through voting and moderation we strive to highlight the nerdiest of what's around and provide content that's a little more thought provoking than other sites.

Submit New Content

Voting Booth

Overall 2008 debate winners?

View Results, All Polls
43 votes, 5 comments
2
Nerd-Its
+ -

RE: I still contend....

Comment comment by gnifyus on 22 January 2008

I'm no expert on this, but as it stands water vapor is by far the biggest contributor to the greenhouse effect. Matter isn't being created or destroyed; it's just locked in a frozen state at the earths poles for now. The link above seems to say that mankind's paltry emissions pale as compared with the effects of water vapor. (But maybe we were always at a tipping point with the water cycle and the extra gasses we are adding has thrown it off; who knows?)

So does that mean the more water in the atmosphere, the warmer we get, and therefore evaporate even more water into the air?

Given the percentages, I wonder if CO2 will even continue to be a significant factor in the whole thing at that point.

You are a viewing a subset of a larger discussion.
View Full Discussion
Star This to Save in Your Profile Favorite
Thread parent sort order:
Highest Voted : Lowest Voted : Oldest : Newest
Thread verbosity:
Expand All : Minimize Replies to Comments
1 Nerd-It - +
RE: I still contend.... by milhous :: NR5

I'm sorry, my question about Newton's law was not meant to be a negative disposition, as I believe in that law whole-heartedly.

What I was inferring is that our Earth's relative atmospheric temperature should be at equilibrium for the most part, with the high and low temperatures due to the water cycles chaotic nature when viewed even in a macro-scale.

Posted 22 January 2008, Hide, Parent, Reply